In this article, I want to share some information and analysis from Four Boxes Diner, and then add on an important observation of my own. Sadly, Americans are not only spending money and debt we can’t afford, but we risk (and lose) American lives so that countries in Europe and Asia can continue abusing the rights of their own people.
Ukraine’s Already Planning A Crackdown On Guns
Whatever your feelings about Ukraine, one thing’s clear: the argument for strict gun control should be dead in that country. People there did their best to prepare for an invasion, but people who didn’t already have a firearm struggled to train and prepare to fight using wooden guns.
As we’ve seen in Israel, a population facing terrorism and warfare ends up ditching gun control, but, the lesson doesn’t seem to be sticking in Ukraine despite their war being nowhere near even over!
Four Boxes Diner, a YouTube channel by constitutional attorney Mark W. Smith is a great source of information on Ukraine and guns. He literally wrote the book on the topic. Sadly (unless you’re a big fan of Vladimir Putin), he doesn’t have great news in this recent video.
A recent survey in Ukraine got the results you’d expect in a war-torn country: that most people want to have a gun (duh!). But, instead of realizing that this could be good for long-term security, researchers are already working hard to lay out justifications and preparations for civilian disarmament after the war. Worse, preparations are already under way.
How can they do this? They’ll do what every other too-big-for-their-britches government does: demand registration. After all, Ukrainians are kind of like Americans after 9/11, and are often far too trusting. So, 2023 was the perfect time to do something “harmless” like build a gun registry. This is how they plan to institute “effective control”.
A Historical Parallel
The history of gun registration is well-known among gun rights activists, but Smith goes through some of the history to make sure people new to this know what he’s talking about. To illustrate how seemingly harmless registration leads to confiscation, he uses the UK as an example.
Until the late 19th century, England was a lot like the United States when it came to firearms. No license was required until 1870, and then only a cheap and easy to get license was required to carry. Even then, the license could be had from the post office, and the punishment for carrying without one was a fine, and not any kind of jail or prison time. It was this way until 1920.
World War I changed all this. Instead of keeping people in the UK armed and prepared for a future war, the government wanted to disarm everyone, but kept the plan a secret for fear that veterans would be in a position to overthrow them. Why? Because World War I was not only the first major war with the horrors of modern industry, but it seemed like a pointless slaughtering machine that the veterans had been sent into. With all of these angry and horrified people coming home armed, they wanted to take care of the elites.
Just over a year later, the UK massively expanded the reach of anti-gun laws, going to what was basically a “may issue” system (a disease we’re still trying to cure in the United States). From then on, the government added more and more restrictions until almost nobody can have a gun, and even those few who can still lawfully own one can’t use it for self defense.
So, in some ways, we’re seeing the same thing happen again. Ukraine is doing exactly the same thing that the UK did, preparing to enact gun control again (perhaps more harshly) once the war is over.
Americans Get To Pay For This Nonsense
Not only should we watch out for this to happen in the United States as Smith says, but we should also keep in mind that Americans are subsidizing gun control not only with massive defense spending, but also with American lives.
Let’s start with what happened when the next war came to the UK. When the Nazis came to power and threatened England, they expected Americans to bail them out.
Yes, this was a real ad in an NRA publication from 1940. American guns were donated to send to the UK to improve civilian safety during the war in case of an invasion. These ended up being used by a uniformed service, the Home Guard, and were largely not returned to the United States after the war ended.
While Russians bore the brunt of casualties fighting the Nazis in World War II, many American lives were lost and a great amount of American money and industrial work went toward saving the UK from Nazi invasion. As a kid, I watched my grandfather suffer from a loss of mobility, caused by injuries and frostbite he sustained fighting for freedom in Europe.
Despite all of these sacrifices, Europe has turned around and not only banned or heavily restricted civilian gun ownership, but they don’t spend that much on their own militaries, leaning on the United States for support. We see the same thing in Asia, with countries like South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and the Phillippines putting their citizens under severe restrictions and constantly begging the United States for more and more military support to defend against North Korea and China’s Communist Party.
But, when these countries fail to invest in their own defenses and fail to prepare their people for the fight, they expect Americans to pay for their defense and for Americans to come and die for them.
I’m personally not against helping allies, because America doesn’t exist in a vacuum. I have friends in some of these countries who are worth taking a risk for. But, we should demand that they help themselves more and quit worrying about gun control before they can expect us to pick up the slack for their lack of strategic foresight.
